#WH warns Pubs not to try to make political football over airline attack
5306 Dead, 439 since 1/20/09
By Agence France-Presse
Sunday, December 27th, 2009 -- 6:10 pm
The White House warned political foes Sunday not to provoke a partisan
tug of war over terrorism, with President Barack Obama yet to publicly
address the thwarted attack on a US airliner.
A political storm erupted over the attempt by a 23-year-old Nigerian to
bring down a Northwest jet carrying 290 people, as senior Obama aides
cranked up a sweeping national and homeland security operation.
But the president, vacationing in Hawaii, conspicuously has not commented
on television about the Christmas Day drama, apparently seeking to
project calm and avoid the political trauma and panic unleashed by past
terror incidents.
"The president believes strongly that this has to be a non-partisan
issue," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs told NBC in one of a string of
television appearances he and Homeland Security Secretary Janet
Napolitano made Sunday.
"This should not be a tug of war between the two political parties. I
hope everyone will resolve in the New Year to make protecting our nation
non-partisan -- rather than what happens in Washington, devolving into
politics," he said.
Story continues below...
Obama got a 6 am (1600 GMT) briefing on latest developments in the probe
into the airborne terror bid from top national security aides, the White
House said in the latest regular bulletin on his response to the crisis.
Gibbs also said that Obama ordered a review of US no-fly watch-lists and
demanded information on how a suspected radical could board the Detroit-
bound airliner rigged with explosives.
After his security briefing, Obama headed to the gym for a game of pick-
up basketball, as the native son recharged in balmy Hawaii.
But the president's Republican foes made the first political thrusts
following Thursday's attack on a Northwest jet heading to Detroit,
accusing him of softening the US focus on radical Islamic terror threats.
They also questioned Napolitano's statement that the air security system
"worked," referring to the fact that alert passengers and crew jumped
Nigerian suspect Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab before his device could fully
detonate.
New York Congressman Peter King said there was no need for Obama to "rush
for a microphone" but noted the president's media ubiquity over the past
year and asked him for a "calm, reassuring" pep talk.
"Tell the American people, 'this is what we're doing; we're on top of
this; we're going to win, but this is a reminder of why we always have to
be alert to the evils of Islamic terrorism,'" King told CBS.
"There has been a virtual vacuum for the last day- and-a-half."
The White House countered that Obama has constantly monitored the
situation, ordered probes into airline security and the use of
intelligence and hiked airport precautions.
"The president refuses to play politics with these issues as he said at
West Point (in December). We must put aside petty politics and recapture
the unity that we had after 9/11," said another Obama spokesman, Bill
Burton in Hawaii.
Democrats repeatedly accused ex-president George W. Bush's administration
of exploiting terror scares for political gain.
But Republicans leveraged Thursday's drama to bolster their theme that
Obama's policies, including reaching out to the Muslim world and closing
the Guantanamo Bay terror camp, were making Americans less safe.
"This whole thing should remind us, that the soft talk about engagement,
closing Gitmo -- these things are not going to appease the terrorists,"
said South Carolina Republican Senator Jim DeMint on Fox.
"They're going to keep coming after us."
Republican congressman Pete Hoekstra added "What do we have here? this is
an international movement of radicalization.
"The Obama administration came in and said, 'We're not going to use the
word terrorism anymore' ... trying to, you know, I think, downplay the
threat from terrorism."
Obama aides have been less prone to use the phrase "war on terror" than
the previous White House, but insist they have refocused the US anti-
terror fight.
"The president certainly has taken steps in his time in office to re-
orient our priorities as it comes to fighting that war on terror," Gibbs
said.
"We are drawing down in Iraq and focusing... on Pakistan and Afghanistan,
the place where the attacks of 9/11 originated," and also focusing on
Yemen and Somalia, he added.
David Hartung
> White House lashes back at GOP critics over bombing attempt
>
> By Agence France-Presse
> Sunday, December 27th, 2009 -- 6:10 pm
>
>
> The White House warned political foes Sunday not to provoke a partisan
> tug of war over terrorism, with President Barack Obama yet to publicly
> address the thwarted attack on a US airliner.
More Democrat "do as I say, not as I do."
5311 Dead, 444 since 1/20/09
Piss off. Come back when you have something honest to say.
David Hartung
Struck a nerve did I?
David Hartung
> "5306 Dead, 439 since 1/20/09" <de...@dead.com> wrote:
>
>> White House lashes back at GOP critics over bombing attempt
>
> are gonna happen no matter which party is
> in charge of the USA at the moment.
In truth, I agree. I do find it ironic, however, that after eight years
of politicizing the war against terrorists, any Democrat could "lash
out" and expect to be taken seriously.
liberal
>
> >> White House lashes back at GOP critics over bombing attempt
>
> > Actually, I agree. These sorts of incidents
> > are gonna happen no matter which party is
> > in charge of the USA at the moment.
>
> In truth, I agree. I do find it ironic, however, that after eight years
> of politicizing the war against terrorists, any Democrat could "lash
> out" and expect to be taken seriously.
Fool, Bush was not conducting a war against terrorism. After all, he
let bin Laden escape from Tora Bora after US forces had trapped him.
Try to understand what democrats are saying.
5311 Dead, 444 since 1/20/09
Nope. Deadened one, actually. You really are a dreary sort.
Stevie Nichts
> > "5306 Dead, 439 since 1/20/09" <d...@dead.com> wrote:
>
> >> White House lashes back at GOP critics over bombing attempt
>
> > � Actually, I agree. These sorts of incidents
> > � are gonna happen no matter which party is
> > � in charge of the USA at the moment.
>
> In truth, I agree. I do find it ironic, however, that after eight years
> of politicizing the war against terrorists, any Democrat could "lash
> out" and expect to be taken seriously.
Given the left's assenting silence when Obama broke
his Gitmo promise, adopted Bush's 'anti-freedom'
terrorism policies, and the rest, "ironic" is one way to put it.
Leftists don't find it amusing when the shoe-bomb is on the
other foot.
Of course, the government response has been to adopt
procedures that wouldn't have prevented this incident.
That's a bipartisan joke.
Stevie Nichts
wrote:
> The White House warned political foes Sunday not to provoke a partisan
> tug of war over terrorism, with President Barack Obama yet to publicly
> address the thwarted attack on a US airliner.
And yet,
Ernst Blofeld
> > >> White House lashes back at GOP critics over bombing attempt
Because being held accountable for running the government is such a
downer.
5311 Dead, 444 since 1/20/09
<nix2n...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Dec 28, 11:21?am, "5306 Dead, 439 since 1/20/09" <d...@dead.com>
Quite so. But it was the BUSHIES exploiting terror for political
gain. All the Democrats were doing was pointing it out.
5311 Dead, 444 since 1/20/09
<nix2n...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Dec 28, 3:06?pm, David Hartung <d_hart...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> Mr.B1ack wrote:
>> > "5306 Dead, 439 since 1/20/09" <d...@dead.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> White House lashes back at GOP critics over bombing attempt
>>
>> > ? Actually, I agree. These sorts of incidents
>> > ? are gonna happen no matter which party is
>> > ? in charge of the USA at the moment.
>>
>> In truth, I agree. I do find it ironic, however, that after eight years
>> of politicizing the war against terrorists, any Democrat could "lash
>> out" and expect to be taken seriously.
>
>Given the left's assenting silence when Obama broke
>his Gitmo promise, adopted Bush's 'anti-freedom'
>terrorism policies, and the rest, "ironic" is one way to put it.
>Leftists don't find it amusing when the shoe-bomb is on the
>other foot.
Of course, you would look a bit less like a fool if you actually READ
left-wing blogs, rather than depending on Faux News to tell you they
aren't talking about Gitmo.
Steve
<ze...@finestplanet.com> wrote:
>Of course, you would look a bit less like a fool if you actually READ
>left-wing blogs, rather than depending on Faux News to tell you they
>aren't talking about Gitmo.
<ROTFLMAO> Reading left-wing blogs identifies you as a complete
fool...
Canyon note: Zepp doesn't even understand the financial terms, let alone
how a mortgage works or how the economy works
"So how come we just had an economic meltdown caused by idiots
trying to pretend mortgage notes were assets?"
--David B.(Zepp) Jamieson Sep 23, 2008
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.politics.misc/msg/095dc573344e163f?hl=en
"And why are dividends on 401Ks considered capital gains? (They are,
when it comes time to cash the 401K in, but Steve wouldn't know that)."
David (Zepp) Jamieson Tue, 29 Jul 2008
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.society.liberalism/msg/25d56714cbea3db9?hl=en
If Nevermore tries paying cap gains with a 1040, he'll
be in jail soon enough.
--David B.(Zepp) Jamieson, Dec 3, 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/msg/30fdaff423e2029b?hl=en&
More stupid claims by Jamieson
Believe it or not, they don't have to be [citizens]. Most states do have such
laws, but not all. Only the president is constitutionally required to
be a citizen.
--David Zepp Jamieson Oct 14, 2008
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/msg/86db866c4aba60fc?hl=en
"I just found out that Condoleezza Rice, [...], the National Security
advisor, spend last evening attending a Broadway play."
--David B.(Zepp) Jamieson Sep 1, 2005
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/msg/30ffcc5ea636...
"Electricity in California was a publically-held utility (i.e.,
government-run) from 1895 until 1998. It took privatization
of the generation plants to fuck everything up
beyond belief."
David (Zepp) Jamieson
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.republicans/msg/3ad9a56512ac8e2e?hl=en
"The first amendment means that you are protected by law from haters."
--David (Zepp) Jamieson
"http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djq&selm=an_541474719
"Well, that's the funny thing about terrorists. If they get what they
want, they stop being terrorists."
--David B.(Zepp) Jamieson
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=q5sc50lf1id03ms1i9truk78v2dk6052f5%404ax.com
"The South couldn't taken any more of the Missouri Compromise,
sensing (correctly) that it would kill slavery in the end,
and Lincoln planned to uphold it."
--David B.(Zepp) Jamieson
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=9j2n5vsqfga7l2fsrt0polt2eg6lqs71hv%404ax.com
"No plane hit the Pentagon."
--David B.(Zepp) Jamieson
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.society.liberalism/msg/39d98c910d32047b?hl=en&
"Incidently, the fact that the Constitution specifies that people have
a right to vote in a presidential election pretty much takes the
choice of having [a presidential election] out of the hands of the states."
--David B.(Zepp) Jamieson Sun, Sep 3 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.society.liberalism/msg/efb4fcac7b1561cb?hl=en&
In fact, I question the milk price, since farm supports put a "floor"
on what retailers can charge.
--David B.(Zepp) Jamieson
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.society.liberalism/msg/f7f4b713c4651011?&hl=en
"Promote the general welfare" chuckles. That means the government is
there to prevent churches, aristocracy, or corporations fron enslaving
the American people.
--David B.(Zepp) Jamieson
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.society.liberalism/msg/f5ef73efac8311bb?hl=en&
"Actually, any beach front has public access, and all state owned
(whether federal or state) must grant equal access to all. That is
the law."
David (Zepp) Jamieson more ignorance of the law
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.society.liberalism/msg/6956aa0300e311c9
5311 Dead, 444 since 1/20/09
Bubbles, could you tell us how Obama is responsible for airport security
in Amsterdam?
Ernst Blofeld
wrote:
Obama seems to think it's possible. Because, you know, there's these
things like passports, passenger manifests, visas, and no-fly lists
that are run by the executive branch.
--
DETROIT, Michigan (AFP) – President Barack Obama ordered Sunday a
review of US no-fly watch-lists and demanded to know how a Nigerian
man managed to board a Detroit-bound airliner wearing an explosive
device.
The system used by US security agencies of lists that become shorter
as the risk increases has come under fire since it emerged that the 23-
year-old bomb suspect was on one of the terrorist data bases when he
embarked on his deadly suicide mission.
"There's a series of data bases that list people of concern to several
agencies across the government. We want to make sure information-
sharing is going on," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs told NBC
news.
The suspect, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, was added to one of the larger
watch-lists last month after his father is said to have told US
embassy officials in Abuja that he was concerned by his son's
increasing radicalism. Related article: Bomber 'trained' by Al-Qaeda
in Yemen
...
Obama had ordered a second review to examine how "an individual with
the chemical explosive he had on him could get onto an airliner in
Amsterdam and fly into this country," Gibbs said.
--
Killing, Inc.
wrote:
Under the Bush administration, the US provided full-body scanners and
other security devices to international airports around the world,
including Amsterdam and Lagos. Despite having no good reason for it,
some of those devices have gone unused recently.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/terrorism/news/article.cfm?c_id=340&objectid=10617686
How is Obama responsible? Simple really. All he had to do is tell
those and other governments that their planes will not fly into the US
without the level of security the US requires, and then stand by that
ultimatum. It would be ridiculous for other governments to accept the
economic damage they would incur for refusal of such a simple request.
Instead, Obama is too busy bowing and kissing everyone's butt for any
kind of toughness and leadership.
5311 Dead, 444 since 1/20/09
> On Dec 28, 5:46 pm, "5311 Dead, 444 since 1/20/09" <d...@dead.com>
> wrote:
>> On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 16:52:06 -0800, Ernst Blofeld wrote:
>> >> > >> White House lashes back at GOP critics over bombing attempt
>>
>> > Because being held accountable for running the government is such a
>> > downer.
>>
>> Bubbles, could you tell us how Obama is responsible for airport
>> security in Amsterdam?
>
> Obama seems to think it's possible. Because, you know, there's these
> things like passports, passenger manifests, visas, and no-fly lists
> that are run by the executive branch.
Hmmm. So you have one government, mandating control of transportation in
all other countries.
And you approve of this?
Ernst Blofeld
wrote:
>
> Hmmm. So you have one government, mandating control of transportation in
> all other countries.
Other countries flying to the US.
The passenger manifests are already forwarded to DHS before the plane
takes off, and the no-fly lists are shared with other nations. Not to
mention the passport checks. I've flown from Europe to the US a few
times and they always do US-style security checks. The Swiss did a
personal interview to size me up.
It already happens. Try to fly as "Osama bin Laden" direct from
Karachi to New York and get back to us.
bvallely
> White House lashes back at GOP critics over bombing attempt
Yes, how DARE Obama be held accountable??? Who do these peasant think
they are? Go back to clutching your bigotries, bibles and
booze!!!!!!
bvallely
wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 12:25:35 -0600, David Hartung wrote:
> > 5306 Dead, 439 since 1/20/09 wrote:
> >> White House lashes back at GOP critics over bombing attempt
> >> By Agence France-Presse
> >> Sunday, December 27th, 2009 -- 6:10 pm
> >> The White House warned political foes Sunday not to provoke a partisan
> >> tug of war over terrorism, with President Barack Obama yet to publicly
> >> address the thwarted attack on a US airliner.
.
> > More Democrat "do as I say, not as I do."
> Piss off. Come back when you have something honest to say.
Zepp pent seven years claiming Bush was responsible for 9/11 now
insists that ANY criticism of Obama is out of bounds.
bvallely
> Nope. Deadened one, actually.
.
So, you've deadened any sense of shame, Zepp? Took the good angel on
your shoulder and strangled him?
It's not worth the effort to feign shock.
bvallely
> "5306 Dead, 439 since 1/20/09" <d...@dead.com> wrote:
.
> >White House lashes back at GOP critics over bombing attempt
> Actually, I agree. These sorts of incidents
.
Except that, post 9/11, it DIDN'T happen on Bush's watch, and now it's
happened two months running.
bvallely
>
> >> White House lashes back at GOP critics over bombing attempt
>
> > Actually, I agree. These sorts of incidents
> > are gonna happen no matter which party is
> > in charge of the USA at the moment.
>
.
I'm sorry, I disagree. Want to stop the terrorist attacks? Make life
Hell for the terrorists. Re-instatnt Sargent English to active duty,
send her a check for six years back pay (with interest), promote her
to General and put her in charge of an expanded Gitmo.
bvallely
> Fool, Bush was not conducting a war against terrorism.>
And yet, there wasn't a post 9/11 terrorist attack on Bush's watch.
Now, we're getting them every month.
.
> After all, he
> let bin Laden escape from Tora Bora after US forces had trapped him.>
Not the slightest evidence bin Laden was in Tora Bora. OTOH, Clnton
admitted that he was offered bin Laden three times, and turned him
down.
.
> Try to understand what democrats are saying.
I understand what democrats are saying - "don't hold us to the same
standard we held Bush."
bvallely
> >> > >> White House lashes back at GOP critics over bombing attempt
> > Because being held accountable for running the government is such a
> > downer.
.
> Bubbles, could you tell us how Obama is responsible for airport security
> in Amsterdam?
Because Homeland Security didn't put the Underwear Bombing on the
"don't fly" list.
bvallely
wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 18:30:42 -0800, Ernst Blofeld wrote:
> > On Dec 28, 5:46 pm, "5311 Dead, 444 since 1/20/09" <d...@dead.com>
> > wrote:
> >> On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 16:52:06 -0800, Ernst Blofeld wrote:
> >> >> > >> White House lashes back at GOP critics over bombing attempt
>
> >> > Because being held accountable for running the government is such a
> >> > downer.
>
> >> Bubbles, could you tell us how Obama is responsible for airport
> >> security in Amsterdam?
>
> > Obama seems to think it's possible. Because, you know, there's these
> > things like passports, passenger manifests, visas, and no-fly lists
> > that are run by the executive branch.
.
> Hmmm. So you have one government, mandating control of transportation in
> all other countries.
.
> And you approve of this? >
No, we're saying that Amsterdam, when checking with Homeland Security
to see if your buddy the Underwear Bomber is allowed in the US, should
have seen a big fat red flag "no-fly".
Homeland Security didn't put UB on the No Fly list. At least three
hundred people almost died because of this act of incompetence - the
head of HS should be unceremoniously canned. Not allowed to quit -
FIRED.
5311 Dead, 444 since 1/20/09
And the airlines, already on the ropes, would hold still for this? Obama
could get the Republicans in Congress to vote for a law like that?
Tell us more!
>
> Instead, Obama is too busy bowing and kissing everyone's butt for any
> kind of toughness and leadership.
So, after months of whining that Obama wants to be a dictator, you're
whining because he isn't a dictator?
5311 Dead, 444 since 1/20/09
So now you're reversing direction and admitting that the US depends on
the willing cooperation of other countries.
Thank you, Blow Hard. You may sit down now.
Ernst Blofeld
> > The passenger manifests are already forwarded to DHS before the plane
> > takes off, and the no-fly lists are shared with other nations. Not to
> > mention the passport checks. I've flown from Europe to the US a few
> > times and they always do US-style security checks. The Swiss did a
> > personal interview to size me up.
>
> > It already happens. Try to fly as "Osama bin Laden" direct from Karachi
> > to New York and get back to us.
>
> So now you're reversing direction and admitting that the US depends on
> the willing cooperation of other countries.
What "reversing direction" are you blathering about?
The US supplies a no-fly list to nations that fly direct to the US.
The
other countries screen passengers accordingly. The would-be
bomber wasn't on the list. If the US executive branch doesn't
supply a list of names, exactly how are the foreign nations going
to screen?
Killing, Inc.
wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 19:12:54 -0800, Killing, Inc. wrote:
> > On Dec 28, 7:46 pm, "5311 Dead, 444 since 1/20/09" <d...@dead.com>
> > wrote:
> >> On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 16:52:06 -0800, Ernst Blofeld wrote:
> >> >> > >> White House lashes back at GOP critics over bombing attempt
>
> >> > Because being held accountable for running the government is such a
> >> > downer.
>
> >> Bubbles, could you tell us how Obama is responsible for airport
> >> security in Amsterdam?
>
> > Under the Bush administration, the US provided full-body scanners and
> > other security devices to international airports around the world,
> > including Amsterdam and Lagos. Despite having no good reason for it,
> > some of those devices have gone unused recently.
>
> >http://www.nzherald.co.nz/terrorism/news/article.cfm?
>
> c_id=340&objectid=10617686
>
>
>
> > How is Obama responsible? Simple really. All he had to do is tell those
> > and other governments that their planes will not fly into the US without
> > the level of security the US requires, and then stand by that ultimatum.
> > It would be ridiculous for other governments to accept the economic
> > damage they would incur for refusal of such a simple request.
>
> And the airlines, already on the ropes, would hold still for this?
Considering Obama is the Pushover In Chief, you might be right about
the airlines having something to worry about if Obama tried to act
like a leader. If anyone in the world thought Obama had one ounce of
integrity and backbone, the airlines wouldn't suffer a single day of
lowered travel. He has neither one of those qualities, so there's no
reason for any nation to do anything but laugh him off as so much
worthless bullshit.
> Obama
> could get the Republicans in Congress to vote for a law like that?
A real leader could, but not Obama. If it's not in his script, he's
clueless.
> Tell us more!
I can't dumb it down for you any more than I already have, Tubby.
Have a nice day.
Steve
<de...@dead.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 19:12:54 -0800, Killing, Inc. wrote:
>
>> On Dec 28, 7:46�pm, "5311 Dead, 444 since 1/20/09" <d...@dead.com>
>> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 16:52:06 -0800, Ernst Blofeld wrote:
>>> >> > >> White House lashes back at GOP critics over bombing attempt
>>>
>>> > Because being held accountable for running the government is such a
>>> > downer.
>>>
>>> Bubbles, could you tell us how Obama is responsible for airport
>>> security in Amsterdam?
>>
>> Under the Bush administration, the US provided full-body scanners and
>> other security devices to international airports around the world,
>> including Amsterdam and Lagos. Despite having no good reason for it,
>> some of those devices have gone unused recently.
>>
>> http://www.nzherald.co.nz/terrorism/news/article.cfm?
>c_id=340&objectid=10617686
>>
>> How is Obama responsible? Simple really. All he had to do is tell those
>> and other governments that their planes will not fly into the US without
>> the level of security the US requires, and then stand by that ultimatum.
>> It would be ridiculous for other governments to accept the economic
>> damage they would incur for refusal of such a simple request.
>
>And the airlines, already on the ropes, would hold still for this? Obama
>could get the Republicans in Congress to vote for a law like that?
>
<LOL> Of course.... but the Democrats might balk
Steve
<de...@dead.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 18:30:42 -0800, Ernst Blofeld wrote:
>
>> On Dec 28, 5:46�pm, "5311 Dead, 444 since 1/20/09" <d...@dead.com>
>> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 16:52:06 -0800, Ernst Blofeld wrote:
>>> >> > >> White House lashes back at GOP critics over bombing attempt
>>>
>>> > Because being held accountable for running the government is such a
>>> > downer.
>>>
>>> Bubbles, could you tell us how Obama is responsible for airport
>>> security in Amsterdam?
>>
>> Obama seems to think it's possible. Because, you know, there's these
>> things like passports, passenger manifests, visas, and no-fly lists
>> that are run by the executive branch.
>
>Hmmm. So you have one government, mandating control of transportation in
>all other countries.
>
>And you approve of this?
>>
Well yes, you ignoramous, since the people that board the planes in
other countries fly into the USA... And it's easy to do, you simply
ban all flights into the USA that haven't met our requirements.
Steve
wrote:
Zepp believes that it would be heresy to criticize The Anointed One.
nobody
wrote:
>On Dec 28, 10:36�am, "5311 Dead, 444 since 1/20/09" <d...@dead.com>
At least Zippy is consistent...in a lib sort of way.
Killing, Inc.
> On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 20:23:56 -0800 (PST), bvallely <bvall...@aol.com>
Consistently hypocritical, but then again this is the same pack of
morons that passes off their hypocrisy as "nuance." You can ask John
Kerry how that blatant equivocation went over with the voters 5 years
ago.
Stevie Nichts
<ze...@finestplanet.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 15:20:33 -0800 (PST), Stevie Nichts
> <nix2nic...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >On Dec 28, 3:06?pm, David Hartung <d_hart...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> Mr.B1ack wrote:
> >> > "5306 Dead, 439 since 1/20/09" <d...@dead.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> White House lashes back at GOP critics over bombing attempt
>
> >> > ? Actually, I agree. These sorts of incidents
> >> > ? are gonna happen no matter which party is
> >> > ? in charge of the USA at the moment.
>
> >> In truth, I agree. I do find it ironic, however, that after eight years
> >> of politicizing the war against terrorists, any Democrat could "lash
> >> out" and expect to be taken seriously.
>
> >Given the left's assenting silence when Obama broke
> >his Gitmo promise, adopted Bush's 'anti-freedom'
> >terrorism policies, and the rest, "ironic" is one way to put it.
> >Leftists don't find it amusing when the shoe-bomb is on the
> >other foot.
>
> Of course, you would look a bit less like a fool if you actually READ
> left-wing blogs, rather than depending on Faux News to tell you they
> aren't talking about Gitmo.
I wasn't talking about Gitmo in this post, cupcake, but
your usual handwaving and subject-changing tells us
that I've struck another lefty nerve.
Stevie Nichts
> The passenger manifests are already forwarded to DHS before the plane
> takes off, and the no-fly lists are shared with other nations. Not to
> mention the passport checks. I've flown from Europe to the US a few
> times and they always do US-style security checks. The Swiss did a
> personal interview to size me up.
The Israelis do it right: they focus on the *people* and not on
the crap that 0.0001% might be carrying.
----
http://www.usatoday.com/news/sept11/2001/10/01/elal-usat.htm
Having lived for decades with bombs and suicide attacks,
Israel designed the industry's most impenetrable flight
security more than 20 years ago. Officials say it is a
stunning success. Despite several wars and endless
conflict at home, El Al's sole hijacking was in 1968,
before the system began.
David Hartung
So why hasn't the USA copied it?
ArmyOfDorkness
"bvallely" <bval...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:f8d72423-3a22-49e4...@j24g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...
You used to be just a jerk but lately you've turned into a Grade-A asshole.
Fuck off Valley
ArmyOfDorkness
"Ernst Blofeld" <blof...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:5b1266e0-143c-4595...@u7g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
This guy didn't do anything to get on a No-Fly list. Just because his dad
said he was acting weird? You know how many people who post on here would be
added to the list? How about all over the world? This guy wasn't showing as
a threat.
David Hartung
Which brings up a very good point. The better we get at finding
potential terrorist attackers, the better the bad guys will get at
finding terrorists who have no record of terrorism.
This merely illustrates the fact that the only way we will eliminate the
treat is to destroy the terrorists. Bush was doing this, will Obama
continue?
David Hartung
Does this mean that he has caught up with you?
5311 Dead, 444 since 1/20/09
I see So-called Vallely can still lie in two different directions at once.
And you're still just a sock puppet.
5311 Dead, 444 since 1/20/09
You prefer Republicans, who simply lie, and then stick with the lie, no
matter how absurd it gets.
How's supply-side economics working out for you, bubbles? Ready to give
it a third go?
Milt
That's strange, because he and I have had a few knock-down drag-outs
because I think some of his criticisms of Obama are unfair and
premature. Guess I just imagined those criticisms, huh?
5311 Dead, 444 since 1/20/09
> ArmyOfDorkness wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Ernst Blofeld" <blof...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:5b1266e0-143c-4595-
b4f5-81b...@u7g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
What was Bush doing, exactly?
5311 Dead, 444 since 1/20/09
There's also the fact that most other nations have their own no-fly lists
(including Amsterdam) and ignore the US one, which fell into disrepute
when it was discovered that thousands of people were on the list because
they had the same name as a suspected terrorist, or had politically
dissented against the Bush administration. At one point, the late
Senator Ted Kennedy was on the list.
5311 Dead, 444 since 1/20/09
Ah, that must be the meme for the day. "Struck a nerve". Are they using
that phrase a lot on Faux this week, Nicky?
Ernst Blofeld
wrote:
> > This merely illustrates the fact that the only way we will eliminate the
> > treat is to destroy the terrorists. Bush was doing this, will Obama
> > continue?
>
> What was Bush doing, exactly?
Attacking one of the organizations responsible rather than arresting
low-level functionaries after the fact.
buzz
> Mr.B1ack wrote:
>>
>>> White House lashes back at GOP critics over bombing attempt
>>
>
> In truth, I agree. I do find it ironic, however, that after eight years
> of politicizing the war against terrorists, any Democrat could "lash
> out" and expect to be taken seriously.
According to simple-minded dummycrats and Hussein, there isn't any war
on terrorism. There aren't any terrorists, just misguided Islamic youths
who attack us because we are so bad. They don't do acts of terrorism,
the do acts of "man caused disasters".
That's what you get with a surrender monkey wimp-in-chief in charge.
Barack Hussein Obmam...mmm mmm mmm
Send HIM to Pakistan to fight Osama...mmm mmm mmm
Simple-minded lying dummycrats (the party that birthed the KKK) and
liberals...morons electing morons.
Steve
wrote:
I'd pay to see a knock-down drag-out between the mousy Shook and the
grubish Jamieson.
pyjamarama
> On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 20:23:56 -0800 (PST), bvallely <bvall...@aol.com>
Zepp's religion most certainly includes the commandments "Thou Shalt
Not Take The Messiah's Name In Vain", "Thou Shalt Not Bear False
Witness" and "Thou Shalt Not Put A Graven Image Before Me"...
The rest of the Judeo-Christian commandments are utterly breakable by
Zepp and his zealots so long as they advances the agenda of the
faithful....
(You know, those speed bumps like killing, stealing, coveting, etc...)
And as we all know about left-wing evangelical zealots, they sure as
fuck aren't shy about imposing their "morals" on the rest of us.
ArmyOfDorkness
"David Hartung" <d_ha...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4b3a08fb$0$5341$bbae...@news.suddenlink.net...
Yo momma
Stevie Nichts
Political correctness. Although at least one Democrat
has now seen the light; Sheila Jackson-Lee (TX) is
now demanding revisions to the way the feds track
potential terrorists -- and using behavioral monitoring:
----
http://www.breitbart.tv/dem-congresswoman-demands-terrorist-tracking-system-changes/
"The assessment of behavioral tendencies, that is not
profiling, but it is the same misstep that we made in
Fort Hood."
----
Stevie Nichts
wrote:
And you're STILL waving your hands and changing the
subject. It's okay to admit that The One has played you
lot for chumps. . Greenwald and Kos long since admitted
it, so you can fall in line any time. Or, you could -- how
do you so artfully phrase it? -- shut up and sit down.
ArmyOfDorkness
"Ernst Blofeld" <blof...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:a919e57d-2def-474d...@m26g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
You don't see Obama sending even more troops as attacking the organization.
He is taking the fight to where they are.
5311 Dead, 444 since 1/20/09
It's a pity you're so in love with your blind partisanship that you
don't actually read what I write. If you did, you wouldn't make the
utterly foolish claim that I regard Obama as being above criticism.
But it suits my purposes for you to look like an idiot, so do go on...
>
>(You know, those speed bumps like killing, stealing, coveting, etc...)
>
>And as we all know about left-wing evangelical zealots, they sure as
>fuck aren't shy about imposing their "morals" on the rest of us.
We don't care where you get your morals, just as long as you get some.
5311 Dead, 444 since 1/20/09
<nix2n...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Dec 29, 11:28?am, "5311 Dead, 444 since 1/20/09" <d...@dead.com>
>wrote:
>> On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 04:09:12 -0800, Stevie Nichts wrote:
>> > On Dec 28, 8:17?pm, "5311 Dead, 444 since 1/20/09"
>> > <ze...@finestplanet.com> wrote:
>> >> On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 15:20:33 -0800 (PST), Stevie Nichts
>> >> <nix2nic...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >> >On Dec 28, 3:06?pm, David Hartung <d_hart...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> Mr.B1ack wrote:
>> >> >> > "5306 Dead, 439 since 1/20/09" <d...@dead.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> >> >> White House lashes back at GOP critics over bombing attempt
>>
>> >> >> > ? Actually, I agree. These sorts of incidents ? are gonna happen
>> >> >> > no matter which party is ? in charge of the USA at the moment.
>>
>> >> >> In truth, I agree. I do find it ironic, however, that after eight
>> >> >> years of politicizing the war against terrorists, any Democrat could
>> >> >> "lash out" and expect to be taken seriously.
>>
>> >> >Given the left's assenting silence when Obama broke his Gitmo promise,
>> >> >adopted Bush's 'anti-freedom' terrorism policies, and the rest,
>> >> >"ironic" is one way to put it. Leftists don't find it amusing when the
>> >> >shoe-bomb is on the other foot.
>>
>> >> Of course, you would look a bit less like a fool if you actually READ
>> >> left-wing blogs, rather than depending on Faux News to tell you they
>> >> aren't talking about Gitmo.
>>
>> > I wasn't talking about Gitmo in this post, cupcake, but your usual
>> > handwaving and subject-changing tells us that I've struck another lefty
>> > nerve.
>>
>> Ah, that must be the meme for the day. ?
>
>And you're STILL waving your hands and changing the
>subject. It's okay to admit that The One has played you
>lot for chumps. . Greenwald and Kos long since admitted
>it, so you can fall in line any time. Or, you could -- how
>do you so artfully phrase it? -- shut up and sit down.
Why don't you actually read some of the stuff I've posted.
You won't stop looking like a fool -- that's genetic, can't be helped
-- but you'll SOUND a bit less stupid if you actually acquaint
yourself with my opinions.
>
5311 Dead, 444 since 1/20/09
Really, and what organization was that?
And did he win?
bvallely
> On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 20:23:56 -0800 (PST), bvallely <bvall...@aol.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >wrote:
> >> On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 12:25:35 -0600, David Hartung wrote:
> >> > 5306 Dead, 439 since 1/20/09 wrote:
> >> >> White House lashes back at GOP critics over bombing attempt
> >> >> By Agence France-Presse
> >> >> Sunday, December 27th, 2009 -- 6:10 pm
> >.
> >> >> The White House warned political foes Sunday not to provoke a partisan
> >> >> tug of war over terrorism, with President Barack Obama yet to publicly
> >> >> address the thwarted attack on a US airliner.
> >.
> >> > More Democrat "do as I say, not as I do."
> >.
> >> Piss off. Come back when you have something honest to say.
>
> >Zepp pent seven years claiming Bush was responsible for 9/11 now
> >insists that ANY criticism of Obama is out of bounds.
> At least Zippy is consistent...in a lib sort of way.>
.
If Zippy were consistent, he wouldn't have to change his screen name
every few days.
Ernst Blofeld
<ze...@finestplanet.com> wrote:
> >> What was Bush doing, exactly?
>
> >Attacking one of the organizations responsible rather than arresting
> >low-level functionaries after the fact.
>
> Really, and what organization was that?
Al Qaeda
> And did he win?
Killed most of the leadership, and greatly reduced the level of
sophistication the attackers could realistically use.
bvallely
wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 06:25:11 -0500, nobody wrote:
Ah, there's Zippy - he'll launch personal attacks, without responding
to what I write. To paraphrase Dean Vernon Wormer in the 1979
classic "Animal House" - "Fat, cowardly and stupid is no way to go
through life, son."
Rick Saunders
wrote:
> "Ernst Blofeld" <blofel...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
He's going to Yemen? Somalia?
----
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article6970323.ece
President Obama vowed to track down and
destroy terror cells all over the world last
night as he finally ended his silence over a
failed Christmas Day plot to blow up an
American passenger jet.
[...]
“Whether they are from Afghanistan or
Pakistan, Yemen or Somalia, or anywhere
where they are plotting attacks against the
US homeland."
----
Normally, such imperialism would be the
cue for the libbies to bay in full-throated
horrow. Ah, but that was when Bush was
President. It's okay when The One does it!
Rick Saunders
wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 19:12:54 -0800, Killing, Inc. wrote:
> > How is Obama responsible? Simple really. All he had to do is tell those
> > and other governments that their planes will not fly into the US without
> > the level of security the US requires, and then stand by that ultimatum.
> > It would be ridiculous for other governments to accept the economic
> > damage they would incur for refusal of such a simple request.
>
> And the airlines, already on the ropes, would hold still for this? �Obama
> could get the Republicans in Congress to vote for a law like that?
Obama doesn't need the Republicans, as you never
tire of reminding us. No, Obama owns this issue -- that's
what the job of C-in-C is all about. Deal with it, bubbles.
> So, after months of whining that Obama wants to be a dictator, you're
> whining because he isn't a dictator?
The only whining is coming from you idiots as Obama
is, once again, revealed as an ineffectual fool.
Rick Saunders
Hey, cupcake, why don't you post it HERE? At least
somebody will read it that way!
bvallely
Zepp has one set of values when arguing with a fellow liberal, and
quite another set when talking to conservatives? And you believe such
behavior is to be applauded?
BTW, Fake Writer Milt - just where is that regular weekly writing gig
you bragged about?
Ernst Blofeld
> > > How is Obama responsible? Simple really. All he had to do is tell those
> > > and other governments that their planes will not fly into the US without
> > > the level of security the US requires, and then stand by that ultimatum.
> > > It would be ridiculous for other governments to accept the economic
> > > damage they would incur for refusal of such a simple request.
>
> > And the airlines, already on the ropes, would hold still for this? Obama
> > could get the Republicans in Congress to vote for a law like that?
They already do. FAA flight regulations require US levels of security
at the gate for international flights arriving in the US.
Ernst Blofeld
> > Why don't you actually read some of the stuff I've posted.
>
> Hey, cupcake, why don't you post it HERE? At least
> somebody will read it that way!
I'm still waiting for him to denounce Obama as a fascist.
Dacato
> .> Fool, Bush was not conducting a war against terrorism.>
>
> .
> And yet, there wasn't a post 9/11 terrorist attack on Bush's watch.
> Now, we're getting them every month.
> .> After all, he
> > let bin Laden escape from Tora Bora after US forces had trapped him.>
>
> .
> Not the slightest evidence bin Laden was in Tora Bora. OTOH, Clnton
> admitted that he was offered bin Laden three times, and turned him
> down.
> .> Try to understand what democrats are saying.
>
> .
> I understand what democrats are saying - "don't hold us to the same
> standard we held Bush."
But you conveniently forget that 911 WAS ON BUSH'S WATCH and that he
did nothing to prevent it.
bvallely
> >> White House lashes back at GOP critics over bombing attempt
.
> > they are? Go back to clutching your bigotries, bibles and
> > booze!!!!!!
> You used to be just a jerk but lately you've turned into a Grade-A asshole.
> Fuck off Valley
What's the matter, cupcake - your Saul Alinsky tricks aren't working
anymore? It's almost like the conservatives read his book or
something and can predict every stunt you try to pull.
Now, go back to your little bunny hutch and pout.
bvallely
> "David Hartung" <d_hart...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:4b3a08fb$0$5341$bbae...@news.suddenlink.net...
>
>
>
> > ArmyOfDorkness wrote:
>
> >> "bvallely" <bvall...@aol.com> wrote in message
> >>news:f8d72423-3a22-49e4...@j24g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...
> >>> .
> >>>> White House lashes back at GOP critics over bombing attempt
.
> >>> Yes, how DARE Obama be held accountable??? Who do these peasant think
> >>> they are? Go back to clutching your bigotries, bibles and
> >>> booze!!!!!!
> >> You used to be just a jerk but lately you've turned into a Grade-A
> >> asshole. Fuck off Valley
> > Does this mean that he has caught up with you?
> Yo momma.
.
YoBama is so out of touch with America, he put a quarter in a parking
meter and waited for a gumball to come out.
YoBama is so out of touch with America, he thought hamburger helper
came with another person.
YoBama is so out of stupid that he funded a solar powered flashlight.
YoBama is so stupid when you stand next to him you hear the ocean!
YoBama is so stupid she thinks Fleetwood Mac is a new hamburger at
McDonalds!
YoBama is so stupid that she thought Boyz II Men was a day care
center.
5311 Dead, 444 since 1/20/09
That's nice. And the FAA has -what- authority in Amsterdam?
5311 Dead, 444 since 1/20/09
<blof...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Dec 29, 11:41�am, Rick Saunders <retro_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > Why don't you actually read some of the stuff I've posted.
>>
>> Hey, cupcake, why don't you post it HERE? At least
>> somebody will read it that way!
I do. Ever heard of Google?
>
>I'm still waiting for him to denounce Obama as a fascist.
I'm still waiting to hear you admit the Bush administration was
nothing but a monumental fuck up.
5311 Dead, 444 since 1/20/09
<retr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Dec 29, 12:15?am, "5311 Dead, 444 since 1/20/09" <d...@dead.com>
>wrote:
>> On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 19:12:54 -0800, Killing, Inc. wrote:
>
>> > How is Obama responsible? Simple really. All he had to do is tell those
>> > and other governments that their planes will not fly into the US without
>> > the level of security the US requires, and then stand by that ultimatum.
>> > It would be ridiculous for other governments to accept the economic
>> > damage they would incur for refusal of such a simple request.
>>
>> And the airlines, already on the ropes, would hold still for this? ?Obama
>> could get the Republicans in Congress to vote for a law like that?
>
>Obama doesn't need the Republicans, as you never
>tire of reminding us. No, Obama owns this issue -- that's
>what the job of C-in-C is all about. Deal with it, bubbles.
So are you going to push for him to propose such a bill and support
it?
>
>> So, after months of whining that Obama wants to be a dictator, you're
>> whining because he isn't a dictator?
>
>The only whining is coming from you idiots as Obama
>is, once again, revealed as an ineffectual fool.
Yup. Just more GOP two-way whining.
Milt
The only one with inconsistent values here tend to be the right
wingers, especially you. You once considered every criticism of Bush,
fair and unfair, to be "out of bounds," and yet you think nothing of
calling Obama all sorts of names and make all sorts of untrue
accusations and think that's perfectly fine.
You're just a hypocrite Fake Bill.
> And you believe such
> behavior is to be applauded?
Apparently, you have no problem with it when you do it. Do you find
hypocrisy something to be applauded?
>
> BTW, Fake Writer Milt - just where is that regular weekly writing gig
> you bragged about?
Bragged? I don't brag. See? You simply cannot avoid lying and
exaggerating, can you?
This is one reason I don't think you're "the" Bill Vallely, btw. Only
someone with no accomplishments in his life would ever consider the
mere mention of something like the fact that I publish columns pretty
much daily to be "bragging." You and the Stalker have so much
unwarranted envy, you often seem like you'll burst.
5311 Dead, 444 since 1/20/09
<blof...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Dec 29, 11:24�am, "5311 Dead, 444 since 1/20/09"
><ze...@finestplanet.com> wrote:
>> >> What was Bush doing, exactly?
>>
>> >Attacking one of the organizations responsible rather than arresting
>> >low-level functionaries after the fact.
>>
>> Really, and what organization was that?
>
>Al Qaeda
Oh, the ones that moved from Afghanistan to Pakistan, while the ones
in Egypt and Saudi Arabia didn't have to move at all.
>
>> And did he win?
>
>Killed most of the leadership, and greatly reduced the level of
>sophistication the attackers could realistically use.
Uh huh...
Milt
he didn't even do anything to retaliate, as evidenced by the fact that
it's 8 years later and my kid, who was 11 when 9/11 happened, is
fighting in Afghanistan still.
liberal
> On Dec 28, 7:32 pm, "5311 Dead, 444 since 1/20/09" <d...@dead.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 18:30:42 -0800, Ernst Blofeld wrote:
> > > On Dec 28, 5:46 pm, "5311 Dead, 444 since 1/20/09" <d...@dead.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >> On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 16:52:06 -0800, Ernst Blofeld wrote:
> > >> >> > >> White House lashes back at GOP critics over bombing attempt
>
> > >> > downer.
>
> > >> Bubbles, could you tell us how Obama is responsible for airport
> > >> security in Amsterdam?
>
> > > Obama seems to think it's possible. Because, you know, there's these
> > > things like passports, passenger manifests, visas, and no-fly lists
> > > that are run by the executive branch.
> .
> > Hmmm. So you have one government, mandating control of transportation in
> > all other countries.
> .
> > And you approve of this? >
>
> .
> No, we're saying that Amsterdam, when checking with Homeland Security
> to see if your buddy the Underwear Bomber is allowed in the US, should
> have seen a big fat red flag "no-fly".
>
> Homeland Security didn't put UB on the No Fly list.
Okay, there's validity in that point. But when should he have been put
on the "No-Fly" list? 2009...or 2008?
> At least three
> hundred people almost died because of this act of incompetence - the
> head of HS should be unceremoniously canned. Not allowed to quit -
> FIRED.
liberal
> Stevie Nichts wrote:
> > On Dec 28, 11:19 pm, Ernst Blofeld <blofel...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> The passenger manifests are already forwarded to DHS before the plane
> >> takes off, and the no-fly lists are shared with other nations. Not to
> >> mention the passport checks. I've flown from Europe to the US a few
> >> times and they always do US-style security checks. The Swiss did a
> >> personal interview to size me up.
>
> > The Israelis do it right: they focus on the *people* and not on
> > the crap that 0.0001% might be carrying.
> > ----
> >http://www.usatoday.com/news/sept11/2001/10/01/elal-usat.htm
>
> > Having lived for decades with bombs and suicide attacks,
> > Israel designed the industry's most impenetrable flight
> > security more than 20 years ago. Officials say it is a
> > stunning success. Despite several wars and endless
> > conflict at home, El Al's sole hijacking was in 1968,
> > before the system began.
>
> So why hasn't the USA copied it?
Cuz too many teabaggers would be on the list.
liberal
> >> On Dec 28, 9:19 pm, "5311 Dead, 444 since 1/20/09"
>
> >>> > The passenger manifests are already forwarded to DHS before the plane
> >>> > takes off, and the no-fly lists are shared with other nations. Not to
> >>> > mention the passport checks. I've flown from Europe to the US a few
> >>> > times and they always do US-style security checks. The Swiss did a
> >>> > personal interview to size me up.
>
> >>> Karachi
> >>> > to New York and get back to us.
>
> >>> So now you're reversing direction and admitting that the US depends on
> >>> the willing cooperation of other countries.
>
> >> What "reversing direction" are you blathering about?
>
> >> The US supplies a no-fly list to nations that fly direct to the US.
> >> The
> >> other countries screen passengers accordingly. The would-be
> >> bomber wasn't on the list. If the US executive branch doesn't
> >> supply a list of names, exactly how are the foreign nations going
> >> to screen?
>
> > This guy didn't do anything to get on a No-Fly list. Just because his
> > dad said he was acting weird? You know how many people who post on here
> > would be added to the list? How about all over the world? This guy
> > wasn't showing as a threat.
>
> Which brings up a very good point. The better we get at finding
> potential terrorist attackers,
Yeah, but you'd never be allowed in an airplane again!!!!!!! Nor would
the wackjobs like "editor" (et al.) who post about buying (and
selling) ammunition for the killing of democrats.
> the better the bad guys will get at
> finding terrorists who have no record of terrorism.
liberal
That may be a valid point but the FAA has the power to deny a plane to
land in the US.
Steve
Indeed, to even enter US air space..
Steve
The authority to turn away unautherized flights from entering the
United States.
Steve
wrote:
Irony anyone? Poor Shook is a middle aged virgin who has to run
around begging his relatives for a roof over his head and who spends
his time making up lies about his writing ability rather than offering
up examples...
David Hartung
> On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 03:36:08 -0800, Killing, Inc. wrote:
>
>> On Dec 29, 5:25 am, nobody <nob...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 20:23:56 -0800 (PST), bvallely <bvall...@aol.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Dec 28, 10:36 am, "5311 Dead, 444 since 1/20/09" <d...@dead.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 12:25:35 -0600, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>>> 5306 Dead, 439 since 1/20/09 wrote:
>>>>>>> White House lashes back at GOP critics over bombing attempt
>>>> .
>>>>>>> By Agence France-Presse
>>>>>>> Sunday, December 27th, 2009 -- 6:10 pm
>>>> .
>>>>>>> The White House warned political foes Sunday not to provoke a
>>>>>>> partisan tug of war over terrorism, with President Barack Obama
>>>>>>> yet to publicly address the thwarted attack on a US airliner.
>>>> .
>>>>>> More Democrat "do as I say, not as I do."
>>>> .
>>>>> Piss off. Come back when you have something honest to say.
>>>> insists that ANY criticism of Obama is out of bounds.
>> morons that passes off their hypocrisy as "nuance." You can ask John
>> Kerry how that blatant equivocation went over with the voters 5 years
>> ago.
>
> You prefer Republicans, who simply lie, and then stick with the lie, no
> matter how absurd it gets.
>
> How's supply-side economics working out for you, bubbles? Ready to give
> it a third go?
It works just fine as long as the government stays out of the way.
David Hartung
> Irony anyone? Poor Shook is a middle aged virgin who has to run
> around begging his relatives for a roof over his head and who spends
> his time making up lies about his writing ability rather than offering
> up examples...
Upon what evidence do you base your opinion?
David Hartung
Exactly what should he have done?
David Hartung
>> This merely illustrates the fact that the only way we will eliminate the
>> treat is to destroy the terrorists. Bush was doing this, will Obama
>> continue?
>
> What was Bush doing, exactly?
Have you not been paying attention?
Never mind, you don't consider the campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan to
be fights against terrorists. You probably also don't believe that
Bush's proactive approach had anything to do with the fact that there
were no terrorist attacks against us until after he left office.
In other words, you choose to ignore the truth, therefore discussion
with you is a waste of my time.
*us*
>... Bush was responsible for 9/11 ...
He sure was.
He's still making money on it.
Steve
the middle age virgin thing is speculation... based on his past stated
performance with women..
as for the relative thing, he's currently living with relatives..
as for writing.. have you seen any evidence of his writing? He was
just asked to back up his claim that he writes a weekly newsletter and
he bailed..
Steve
wrote:
...and then there's all of Shook's obvious lies like when he claimed
to have been a Congressional Page yet managed to play high school
football at his hometown school or when he claimed to have bought
stock at a price lower than then stock's all time low price...
Ernst Blofeld
<ze...@finestplanet.com> wrote:
> >> > And the airlines, already on the ropes, would hold still for this? Obama
> >> > could get the Republicans in Congress to vote for a law like that?
>
> >They already do. FAA flight regulations require US levels of security
> >at the gate for international flights arriving in the US.
>
> That's nice. And the FAA has -what- authority in Amsterdam?
They control the circumstances in which all aircraft fly into the
United States, you dolt. You've been told this how many times? If Air
Marijuana wants to fly into the US, they have to comply with US
regulations, including passenger screening and checking the no-fly
list. Which they did, but the crotch bomber wasn't on it.
ArmyOfDorkness
"David Hartung" <d_ha...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4b3a81dd$0$5324$bbae...@news.suddenlink.net...
The Bush administration ignored hard evidence from its top intelligence
officials between April and September of 2001 about an impending attack by
al-Qaeda on US soil. Even a intelligence memo titled "Bin Laden determined
to attack inside US" that President Bush received a month before 9/11
couldn't move Bush to take such threats seriously. The CIA sent President
Bush a daily intelligence briefing on August 6, 2001, saying the agency had
"detected patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with
preparations for hijackings," no one in the administration acted on the
report.
As former Bush administration counter-terrorism czar Richard Clarke told the
9/11 Commission investigating the attacks in 2004: "To the loved ones of the
victims of 9/11, to them who are here in the room, to those who are watching
on television, your government failed you."
*us*
>The Bush administration ignored hard evidence from its top intelligence
>officials between April and September of 2001 about an impending attack by
>al-Qaeda on US soil. Even a intelligence memo titled "Bin Laden determined
>to attack inside US" that President Bush received a month before 9/11
>couldn't move Bush to take such threats seriously. The CIA sent President
>Bush a daily intelligence briefing on August 6, 2001, saying the agency had
>"detected patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with
>preparations for hijackings," no one in the administration acted on the
>report.
>
>As former Bush administration counter-terrorism czar Richard Clarke told the
>9/11 Commission investigating the attacks in 2004: "To the loved ones of the
>victims of 9/11, to them who are here in the room, to those who are watching
>on television, your government failed you."
Bush is still making money on 9/11.
5311 Dead, 444 since 1/20/09
They also had to ignore a lot of strident warnings from the outgoing
Clinton administration, especially in regards to OBL. You'll recall that
Clinton, on at least two occasions, tried to have him assassinated while
Republicans hooted derisively.
5311 Dead, 444 since 1/20/09
That one alone marks you as certifiable.
leona...@gmail.com
wrote:
>
> That one alone marks you as certifiable.
• ROTFLMAO
Didn'tcha know fatboy Zepp is a one trick pony
and can not find another.
nobody
wrote:
>On Dec 29, 2:46�pm, bvallely <bvall...@aol.com> wrote:
Please show that he has done so in the past.
David Hartung
If being a believer in limited government(which the USA has not had
since before WWII), and an unregulated private sector, makes me
certifiable, then so be it